評論
打印
Mr. Wehrum acknowledged that the administration was considering a handful of analyses
這一措施預計會造成1400人早逝，韋魯姆承認，
that would reduce the prediction of 1,400 premature deaths as a result of the measure.
政府正在考慮幾種能夠降低這一數(shù)額的分析方法。
He called the attention given to that initial forecast “unfortunate”
他稱，人們關注到了環(huán)保署最初的這一預測，此乃“不幸”，
and said the agency had included the figure in its analysis
他還表示，該機構之所以將這一數(shù)字納入其分析范圍，
to show the varied results that can be achieved based on different assumptions.
是為了顯示預測結果會因假設不同而不同。
Mr. Wehrum said the analyses the agency is conducting “illuminate the issue” of particulate matter
韋魯姆說，該機構正在進行的分析“闡明了”顆粒物問題，
and the question of what level is acceptable for the purposes of policymaking.
也闡明了制定政策時怎樣的水平才能被接受的問題。
He said new approaches would allow for public debate to move ahead
他說，新方法會推進公眾辯論，
and that any new methods would be subject to peer review if they became the agency’s primary tool for measuring health risks.
而且，任何方法，在成為該機構衡量健康風險的主要工具之后，都要受到同行的審查。
“This isn’t just something I’m cooking up here in my fifth-floor office in Washington,” Mr. Wehrum said.
“這并不是我正在華盛頓五樓的這間辦公室里做的唯一事情，”威魯姆說。
Roger O. McClellan, who has served on E.P.A. advisory boards
羅杰·麥克萊倫是環(huán)保署顧問委員會的成員，
and as president of the Chemical Industry Institute of Toxicology, an industry-financed research center,
也是行業(yè)資助的研究中心“化學工業(yè)毒理學研究所”的所長，
said that the data for health risks below the particulate matter standard was weak
他表示，有關水平低于顆粒物標準的空氣的健康風險數(shù)據(jù)比較疲弱，
and that he did not accept the argument that agencies must calculate risk “down to the first molecule of exposure.”
而且，他不接受各大機構在計算風險的時候要計算“到第一個暴露的分子”這樣的觀點。
“These kinds of approaches —
“這些方法——
that every molecule, every ionization, carries with it an associated calculable health risk —
每一個分子，每一次電離都會帶來相應的，可計算的健康風險——
are just misleading,” Mr. McClellan said.
——就是在誤導大家，”麥克萊倫說。
To put the matter in perspective, most scientists say particulate matter standards are like speed limits.
大多數(shù)科學家都一致表示，客觀來講，顆粒物標準就如同限速標準。
On many highways, a limit of 65 miles per hour is considered reasonable to protect public safety.
在很多高速公路上，65英里的限速都被認為是保護公共安全的一個合理措施。
But that doesn’t mean the risk of an accident disappears at 55 m.p.h., or even 25.
但這并不意味著時速55英里，甚至是25英里時發(fā)生交通事故的風險就會消失。
Jonathan M. Samet, a pulmonary disease specialist who is dean of the Colorado School of Public Health,
喬納森·薩梅特是科羅拉多公共衛(wèi)生學院院長兼肺病專家，
said the most recent studies showed negative health effects well below the 12-microgram standard.
他說，最近的多項研究表明，微粒水平遠低于12微克這一標準的空氣依然會給人體健康帶來負面影響。
“It’s not a hard stop where we can say ‘below that, air is safe.’
“這一標準并不是硬性標準，所以我們不能說，‘低于這一水平，空氣就是安全的。’
That would not be supported by the scientific evidence,” Dr. Samet said.
這種說法是不會得到科學證據(jù)的佐證的，”薩米特博士說。
“It would be very nice for public health if things worked that way, but they don’t seem to.”
“如果那樣真能奏效的話，對公共衛(wèi)生將是非常有益的，但事實似乎并非如此。”
Daniel S. Greenbaum, president of the Health Effects Institute,
丹尼爾·格林鮑姆是健康影響研究所的所長，
a nonprofit research organization that is funded by the E.P.A. and industry groups,
這是環(huán)保署和行業(yè)團體聯(lián)合資助的一個非盈利研究組織，
acknowledged there was uncertainty around the effects of fine particulate matter exposure below the standard.
格林鮑姆承認，低于標準水平的細顆粒物暴露量的影響依然存在不確定性。
He said it was reasonable of the Trump administration to study the issue,
他說，特朗普政府研究這個問題是合理的，
but he questioned moving ahead with a new system before those studies are in.
但他對還未開始這些研究就采納新系統(tǒng)繼續(xù)邁進這種做法提出了質疑。
“To move away from the way this has been done without the benefit of this full scientific peer review is unfortunate,” he said.
他說:“沒有進行全面而科學的審查就改變傳統(tǒng)的評估方法是不會有好結果的。”
譯文由可可原創(chuàng)，僅供學習交流使用，未經(jīng)許可請勿轉載。
